Karnataka High Court
Narayana Murthy vs State Of Karnataka on 1 August, 2014
Author: R.B Budihal
Bench: R.B Budihal.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT
BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 01ST DAY OF AUGUST 2014
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDIHAL. R.B
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4192/2014
BETWEEN:
Narayana Murthy,
S/o. late Kariyappa,
Aged 46 years,
R/at Sharada Devinagara,
Belagumba Road,
Tumkur-576 162. .. PETITIONER
(By Sri. A.H. Bhagavan, Adv.)
AND:
State of Karnataka,
By N.E.P.S. Police Station,
Tumkur,
Rep. by the State Public Prosecutor,
High Court Building,
Bangalore-560 001. .. RESPONDENT
(By Sri. B.J. Eswarappa, HCGP)
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of
the Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in
the event of his arrest in Cr. No.130/2014 of New
Extension P.S., Tumkur, for the offences P/U/S 504,
306 read with 34 of IPC and under Section 4 of the
2
Karnataka Prohibition of Charging Exorbitant Interest
Act, 2004.
This Criminal Petition coming on for orders this
day, the Court made the following:
ORDER
This petition is filed by petitioner/accused No.1 under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail to direct the respondent-police to release the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 306 and 504 r/w Section 34 of IPC and also under Section 4 of the Karnataka Prohibition of Charging Exorbitant Interest Act, 2004 registered in respondent-police station Crime No. 130/2014.
2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner-accused No.1 and also the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.
3. I have perused the averments made in the bail petition, FIR, complaint, order of the lower Court, spot 3 mahazar copy and other documents produced by the counsel for the petitioner along with the petition.
4. As per the allegations in the complaint, the father of the deceased is the complainant in this case wherein he has stated that deceased was residing at Tumkur with his father, wife and children. His son is aged 19 years and daughter is aged 21 years. Deceased was running Wheel Alignment Shop under the name and style of Perfect Wheels at 5th cross, Vidyanagar Tumkur. Deceased had borrowed Rs.2 lakhs as loan on interest from the petitioner. He had also borrowed money from others. Petitioner and his associate Shashi, who is accused No.2 were harassing the deceased for interest and others were also making demand for the return of the loan amount. On 2.7.2014 at about 11.30 a.m., accused No.2 went to the shop of the deceased and forced him to pay Rs.6 lakhs towards the loan. Accused No.2 is also said to have abused and threatened him by saying that his son would be 4 kidnapped if he did not return the money. The deceased's father who had gone to Sira on that day also talked to Shashi and told him that he would come in the evening and settle the matter until then he should not do anything. In spite of that accused No.2-Shashi refused to heed to the request of the complainant and forcibly closed and locked the shop and went away with the key. Being upset by this, deceased went home and committed suicide at home at about 3.30 p.m. by hanging. On the basis of the complaint, case has been registered against the petitioner and accused No.2 for the alleged offences.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner during the course of his arguments has submitted that this case does not attract provisions of Section 306 of IPC. There is no abetment of suicide by the accused persons and more particularly by the present petitioner who is accused No.1. Even if it is assumed that accused No.2 had gone to the said shop it was with an intention to 5 collect the loan amount of Rs.2 lakhs with interest and there was no intention to cause the death of the deceased by abetting him.
6. As per the case of the prosecution, deceased has left the death note wherein he has alleged that petitioner is also responsible for taking the steps to commit suicide.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that deceased was indebted to so many persons of totally Rs.19 lakhs and from one Co- operative Society he had borrowed Rs.30 lakhs as loan. These materials prima facie shows that because of the huge debt he had incurred, he might have committed suicide. It is further submitted that deceased was having the mentality of committing suicide. He drew the attention of this Court to the document at page No.20 issued from Dr.K.Narasimhaiah Hospital and submitted that, 15 days earlier to this incident also 6 deceased had made an attempt to commit suicide by consuming tablets. The offences alleged are also not exclusively punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Hence, by imposing reasonable conditions, petitioner may be admitted to bail.
8. As against this, learned Government Pleader during the course of his arguments has submitted that in the complaint there is an allegation against the petitioner that he was also insisting the deceased to pay the loan amount of Rs.2 lakhs with interest. The deceased has left the death note wherein he has clearly mentioned that the present petitioner who is accused No.1 is responsible for him to take such drastic step of committing suicide. This material prima facie shows the involvement of the petitioner in the commission of the alleged offences. The matter is still under investigation and hence, petitioner is not entitled to be granted with anticipatory bail at this stage and accordingly, it is submitted to reject the application. 7
9. Looking to the allegations in the complaint it shows that the deceased had borrowed Rs.2 lakhs from the present petitioner for interest and he was due to pay Rs.2 lakhs with interest to the petitioner. The further allegation in the complaint is that accused No.2 went to the shop of the deceased and has abused him in filthy language and threatened him that if he did not pay the principal amount of Rs.2 lakhs with interest of Rs.4 lakhs i.e., totally Rs.6 lakhs, he is going to kidnap the son of the deceased and also close the shop of the deceased. It is no doubt true as submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner-accused No.1 that there is nothing wrong in asking for return of the loan amount from the deceased along with interest. But the allegations in the complaint goes to show that accused No.2 posed life threat to the deceased stating that he is going to kidnap his son and close the shop of the deceased.
8
10. Even if the allegations are taken to be true at this stage, they are against accused No.2. Whether accused No.2 had been to the shop, posed life threat and abused the deceased at the instance of the present petitioner-accused No.1 or not, is a matter to be ascertained during the course of trial after recording the evidence in the case. So far as petitioner is concerned, the only allegation is that he has advanced Rs.2 lakhs loan and was insisting the deceased to pay Rs.2 lakhs loan amount along with interest. Looking to the materials on record, serious allegations are made against accused No.2 that he had been to the spot, abused and threatened the deceased and he is said to be responsible for the death of the deceased in this case.
11. I have also perused the documents produced in the case by the learned counsel for the petitioner. The document dated 17.6.2014 issued from K.Narasimhaiah Hospital shows that 15 days earlier to 9 the alleged incident, the deceased had made an attempt to commit suicide by consuming tablets. Other materials produced in the case and also the case of the prosecution shows that deceased was not only indebted to the petitioner to the tune of Rs.2 lakhs but even with others he had borrowed the loan amount to the tune of Rs.17 lakhs, which is mentioned in the mahazar drawn by the police.
12. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also produced one more document which shows that deceased had borrowed Rs.30 lakhs from Sri Maharishi Valmiki Co-operative Society. These materials at this stage prima facie shows that as the deceased was heavily indebted, that might be the reason for him to take a decision to put an end to his life and the said possibility cannot be ruled out. Hence, looking to the materials on record, I am of the opinion that petitioner has made out a case for his release on bail. Further, the alleged offence under Section 306 of IPC is also not 10 exclusively punishable with death or imprisonment for life.
13. Accordingly, petition is allowed. The respondent-police are directed to release the petitioner- accused No.1 on bail in the event of his arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 306 and 504 r/w Section 34 of IPC and also under Section 4 of the Karnataka Prohibition of Charging Exorbitant Interest Act, 2004 registered in respondent-police station Crime No. 130/2014, subject to the following conditions:
(i) Petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- and furnish one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court.
(ii) He shall not tamper with any of the
prosecution witnesses directly or
indirectly.
(iii) He shall make himself available before
the Investigating Officer for interrogation whenever called for.11
(iv) He shall appear before the concerned Court within 30 days from the date of this order and to execute personal bond and also surety bond.
Sd/-
JUDGE bkp